All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 10:36:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adbdbfbcecb65a1eca21afa622679836@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56041147-0bd8-dbb2-d1ca-550f3db7f05d@redhat.com>

Hi Eric,

On 2021-01-27 17:53, Auger Eric wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> 
> On 1/25/21 1:26 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Upgrading the PMU code from ARMv8.1 to ARMv8.4 turns out to be
>> pretty easy. All that is required is support for PMMIR_EL1, which
>> is read-only, and for which returning 0 is a valid option as long
>> as we don't advertise STALL_SLOT as an implemented event.
>> 
>> Let's just do that and adjust what we return to the guest.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h |  3 +++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c       |  6 ++++++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c       | 11 +++++++----
>>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h 
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> index 8b5e7e5c3cc8..2fb3f386588c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> @@ -846,7 +846,10 @@
>> 
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT		24
>> 
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_0		0x3
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1		0x4
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4		0x5
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_5		0x6
>> 
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_SWP_FRAC_SHIFT		28
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_PSR_M_SHIFT		24
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> index 398f6df1bbe4..72cd704a8368 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> @@ -795,6 +795,12 @@ u64 kvm_pmu_get_pmceid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
>> bool pmceid1)
>>  		base = 0;
>>  	} else {
>>  		val = read_sysreg(pmceid1_el0);
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Don't advertise STALL_SLOT, as PMMIR_EL0 is handled
>> +		 * as RAZ
>> +		 */
>> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.pmuver >= ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4)
>> +			val &= ~BIT_ULL(ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_STALL_SLOT - 32);
> what about the STALL_SLOT_BACKEND and FRONTEND events then?

Aren't these a mandatory ARMv8.1 feature? I don't see a reason to
drop them.

>>  		base = 32;
>>  	}
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> index 8f79ec1fffa7..5da536ab738d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> @@ -1051,16 +1051,16 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu 
>> *vcpu,
>>  		/* Limit debug to ARMv8.0 */
>>  		val &= ~FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER);
>>  		val |= FIELD_PREP(FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER), 6);
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	case SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1:
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	}
>> 
>> @@ -1496,6 +1496,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
>> = {
>> 
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENSET_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENCLR_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
> "KVM: arm64: Hide PMU registers from userspace when not available"
> changed the above, doesn't it?

Yes, that's because the fix didn't make it in mainline before
5.11-rc5, and I based this on -rc4. I'll fix it at merge time.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 10:36:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adbdbfbcecb65a1eca21afa622679836@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56041147-0bd8-dbb2-d1ca-550f3db7f05d@redhat.com>

Hi Eric,

On 2021-01-27 17:53, Auger Eric wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> 
> On 1/25/21 1:26 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Upgrading the PMU code from ARMv8.1 to ARMv8.4 turns out to be
>> pretty easy. All that is required is support for PMMIR_EL1, which
>> is read-only, and for which returning 0 is a valid option as long
>> as we don't advertise STALL_SLOT as an implemented event.
>> 
>> Let's just do that and adjust what we return to the guest.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h |  3 +++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c       |  6 ++++++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c       | 11 +++++++----
>>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h 
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> index 8b5e7e5c3cc8..2fb3f386588c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> @@ -846,7 +846,10 @@
>> 
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT		24
>> 
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_0		0x3
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1		0x4
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4		0x5
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_5		0x6
>> 
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_SWP_FRAC_SHIFT		28
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_PSR_M_SHIFT		24
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> index 398f6df1bbe4..72cd704a8368 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> @@ -795,6 +795,12 @@ u64 kvm_pmu_get_pmceid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
>> bool pmceid1)
>>  		base = 0;
>>  	} else {
>>  		val = read_sysreg(pmceid1_el0);
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Don't advertise STALL_SLOT, as PMMIR_EL0 is handled
>> +		 * as RAZ
>> +		 */
>> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.pmuver >= ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4)
>> +			val &= ~BIT_ULL(ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_STALL_SLOT - 32);
> what about the STALL_SLOT_BACKEND and FRONTEND events then?

Aren't these a mandatory ARMv8.1 feature? I don't see a reason to
drop them.

>>  		base = 32;
>>  	}
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> index 8f79ec1fffa7..5da536ab738d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> @@ -1051,16 +1051,16 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu 
>> *vcpu,
>>  		/* Limit debug to ARMv8.0 */
>>  		val &= ~FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER);
>>  		val |= FIELD_PREP(FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER), 6);
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	case SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1:
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	}
>> 
>> @@ -1496,6 +1496,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
>> = {
>> 
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENSET_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENCLR_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
> "KVM: arm64: Hide PMU registers from userspace when not available"
> changed the above, doesn't it?

Yes, that's because the fix didn't make it in mainline before
5.11-rc5, and I based this on -rc4. I'll fix it at merge time.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 10:36:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adbdbfbcecb65a1eca21afa622679836@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56041147-0bd8-dbb2-d1ca-550f3db7f05d@redhat.com>

Hi Eric,

On 2021-01-27 17:53, Auger Eric wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> 
> On 1/25/21 1:26 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Upgrading the PMU code from ARMv8.1 to ARMv8.4 turns out to be
>> pretty easy. All that is required is support for PMMIR_EL1, which
>> is read-only, and for which returning 0 is a valid option as long
>> as we don't advertise STALL_SLOT as an implemented event.
>> 
>> Let's just do that and adjust what we return to the guest.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h |  3 +++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c       |  6 ++++++
>>  arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c       | 11 +++++++----
>>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h 
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> index 8b5e7e5c3cc8..2fb3f386588c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> @@ -846,7 +846,10 @@
>> 
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT		24
>> 
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_0		0x3
>>  #define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1		0x4
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4		0x5
>> +#define ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_5		0x6
>> 
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_SWP_FRAC_SHIFT		28
>>  #define ID_ISAR4_PSR_M_SHIFT		24
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> index 398f6df1bbe4..72cd704a8368 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/pmu-emul.c
>> @@ -795,6 +795,12 @@ u64 kvm_pmu_get_pmceid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, 
>> bool pmceid1)
>>  		base = 0;
>>  	} else {
>>  		val = read_sysreg(pmceid1_el0);
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Don't advertise STALL_SLOT, as PMMIR_EL0 is handled
>> +		 * as RAZ
>> +		 */
>> +		if (vcpu->kvm->arch.pmuver >= ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4)
>> +			val &= ~BIT_ULL(ARMV8_PMUV3_PERFCTR_STALL_SLOT - 32);
> what about the STALL_SLOT_BACKEND and FRONTEND events then?

Aren't these a mandatory ARMv8.1 feature? I don't see a reason to
drop them.

>>  		base = 32;
>>  	}
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> index 8f79ec1fffa7..5da536ab738d 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>> @@ -1051,16 +1051,16 @@ static u64 read_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu 
>> *vcpu,
>>  		/* Limit debug to ARMv8.0 */
>>  		val &= ~FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER);
>>  		val |= FIELD_PREP(FEATURE(ID_AA64DFR0_DEBUGVER), 6);
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_AA64DFR0_PMUVER_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	case SYS_ID_DFR0_EL1:
>> -		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.1 */
>> +		/* Limit guests to PMUv3 for ARMv8.4 */
>>  		val = cpuid_feature_cap_perfmon_field(val,
>>  						      ID_DFR0_PERFMON_SHIFT,
>> -						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_1 : 0);
>> +						      kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) ? ID_DFR0_PERFMON_8_4 : 0);
>>  		break;
>>  	}
>> 
>> @@ -1496,6 +1496,7 @@ static const struct sys_reg_desc sys_reg_descs[] 
>> = {
>> 
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENSET_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
>>  	{ SYS_DESC(SYS_PMINTENCLR_EL1), access_pminten, reset_unknown, 
>> PMINTENSET_EL1 },
> "KVM: arm64: Hide PMU registers from userspace when not available"
> changed the above, doesn't it?

Yes, that's because the fix didn't make it in mainline before
5.11-rc5, and I based this on -rc4. I'll fix it at merge time.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-03 10:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-25 12:26 [PATCH v2 0/7] KVM: arm64: More PMU/debug ID register fixes Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: arm64: Fix missing RES1 in emulation of DBGBIDR Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-26 17:32   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-26 17:32     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-26 17:32     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] KVM: arm64: Fix AArch32 PMUv3 capping Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-26 17:35   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-26 17:35     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-26 17:35     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] KVM: arm64: Add handling of AArch32 PCMEID{2, 3} PMUv3 registers Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` [PATCH v2 3/7] KVM: arm64: Add handling of AArch32 PCMEID{2,3} " Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` [PATCH v2 3/7] KVM: arm64: Add handling of AArch32 PCMEID{2, 3} " Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Refactor filtering of ID registers Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 12:12   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 12:12     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 12:12     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] KVM: arm64: Limit the debug architecture to ARMv8.0 Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 12:18   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 12:18     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 12:18     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Upgrade PMU support to ARMv8.4 Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:09   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:09     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:09     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:35     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:35       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:35       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:00       ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:00         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:00         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:23         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:23           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:23           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 17:41   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:41     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:41     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-03 10:32     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 10:32       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 10:32       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 17:29       ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-03 17:29         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-03 17:29         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:53   ` Auger Eric
2021-01-27 17:53     ` Auger Eric
2021-01-27 17:53     ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 10:36     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2021-02-03 10:36       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 10:36       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 11:07       ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 11:07         ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 11:07         ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 11:20         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 11:20           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 12:39           ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 12:39             ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 12:39             ` Auger Eric
2021-02-03 13:28             ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 13:28               ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-03 13:28               ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 12:32               ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-04 12:32                 ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-04 12:32                 ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-02-04 14:21                 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:21                   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-04 14:21                   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] KVM: arm64: Use symbolic names for the PMU versions Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-25 12:26   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-01-27 14:28   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:28     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 14:28     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-01-27 17:56   ` Auger Eric
2021-01-27 17:56     ` Auger Eric
2021-01-27 17:56     ` Auger Eric

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=adbdbfbcecb65a1eca21afa622679836@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.